Re: [office] Re: [office-comment] Re: my comments on the numbering spec proposal discussed by David F. andFlorian R.

[David Faure <faure@kde.org>]

On Monday 11 December 2006 18:10, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> 
> On Dec 11, 2006, at 12:04 PM, David Faure wrote:
> 
> > However the notion of a list-id for a bit more structure sounds  
> > nice, and from what I recall,
> > MSWord lists also have the equivalent of a list-id, this is where  
> > this idea mostly comes from.
> 
> My question about the generic identity issue goes back to the xml:id  
> discussion. Do we want to converge the myriad of different equivalent  
> attributes (but which XML tools of course do not understand as such)  
> towards xml:id? If yes, should we be introducing still new id  
> attributes?

Well that's very different ;) xml-id is supposed to be unique, right?
list-id, on the other hand, is about referring to a list from multiple numbered paragraphs,
so it's definitely NOT unique (the same value would be found multiple times in a given
xml document).

-- 
David Faure, faure@kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).